There are thousands of patristic references to Adam - an immeasurable chaos.
However, it will be hard to locate a verse that refers to Adam in an
absolutely univocal manner; i.e., a verse that cannot but imply a specific
person. An endeavour like this is a difficult one, for two reasons: a) Because the Fathers had no cause to
outrightly state (per our rationale) that Adam "is
not a symbolic
person”. Such an issue had not been put forward as a theory during their
time, which is why they did not preoccupy themselves with something that
they regarded a given fact; and b) Because
in the case of Adam, a multitude of symbolisms do also
apply, however without them annulling his literal existence
as a person - as the hypostatic beginning of mankind.
It is for this reason that in the present article priority
has been given (among the multitude of texts that could have
been cited), to the more palpable ones, without the need for
one to have a knowledge of classical Greek - such basic and
essential texts being: the Holy Bible - the Sacred Canons -
two or three of the major Fathers and a very concise
analysis of the ‘person-centred’ theology, so that anyone
can comprehend just how significant the literal acceptance
of the person of Adam is, for the Christian faith.
To answer
this question we could begin with the New Testament itself.
In the
Gospel of Luke which presents the genealogy of Jesus Christ
(Luke 3:23-28) - in other words, the persons through which
human nature
[1] “reached” the
Lord - it is apparent that Adam is mentioned as one of
many other historical -
and not symbolic - persons:
"36...of
Cainan, who was of Arphaxad, who was of Sem, who was of
Noah, who was of Lamech, 37who
was of Methuselah, who was of Enoch, who was of Jared, who
was of Maleleel, who was of Cainan,
38who was of
Enos, who was of Seth, who was
of Adam, who was of God."
(Luke
3:36-38)
Thus, the
Orthodox Church has accordingly instituted the Feast of the
Holy Forefathers,
[2]
during which the following resurrectional ("sticheron") hymn
is chanted, where it again is impossible to arbitrarily
exempt Adam (as if he were only a symbolic character) amid
an entire sequence of historical persons:
"Come, all you lovers of feasts, let us
laud with psalms: Adam the
Forefather, Enoch. Noah,
Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; after the law Moses
and Aaron, Joshua, Samuel and David; after whom Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel and the Twelve, together with
Elijah, Elissaios and them all; Zechariah and the Baptist
and all those who proclaimed Christ, the life and the
resurrection of our kind."
In the
Sacred Canons of the Church,
Adam is commemorated in one of the Canons that were issued
by the Synod of Carthage (AD 419). Of course this was a
Local Synod, however its Canons acquired ecumenical
authority after having been validated by the 2nd Canon
of the Quinisext Ecumenical Synod[3].
The 109th Canon of the Synod
of Carthage mentions the
following about Adam - whom it obviously treats as a
historical person with a body and a soul:
“…Whosoever
says that Adam, the
first-made man, was made
thus mortal, so that
whether he sinned or not, he would have died in body – that
is, he would have exited the body
as a soul, not on account of sin, but by natural
necessity, let him be anathema.”
[4]
Adam’s
historicity is equally stressed by the prominent Father of
the Church and recapitulating dogmatologist,
Saint John of
Damascus:
“…
everything that the Father has are also His
(the Holy Spirit's)
except for unbegottenness; which does not signify a
difference in the Essence or the status, but the manner of
Their existence - just as Adam was unborn (for he was a
creation of God) and Seth who was born (for he was a son of
Adam) and Eve, who proceeded from Adam’s side (for she was
not born), thus they too do not differ from each other in
nature (for they are all human beings), but only in their
manner of existence”
[5].
Saint
Athanasius the Great regards
Adam not as a symbolic figure, but as much a historical one
as Moses; and this is also confirmed by the fact that he
speaks of the Incarnation - the
Lord’s “entry” into human history:
“…and,
albeit immediately able, even from the very beginning
in Adam's time, or Noah's or
Moses', to send forth His Logos,
He did not send Him...
[6]
Moreover,
we can also discern the same correlation (about the
historicity of Adam's person) in the words of the Apostle
Paul:
“…
but death reigned, from Adam
up to Moses…” (Romans
5:14)
But even
in regard to the content of Orthodox Theology, it is an
entirely inappropriate perception that would give priority
to the “essence” over the true being, the “person”.
In order
to clarify these terms with certain examples: “lumber”
is an essence, but “wooden objects” are the beings.
Respectively, “humanity” is understood as being the
essence, but “the human” is the being, the
person. The being is something tangible and we
perceive it with our senses, whereas we only have indirect
communication with the essence.
In the “person-centredness
of Hellenic Patristic thought [...]
first place is no longer given to the notion of the essence,
but to the person, the existence, the being. Instead
of an impersonal ‘divine’, reference is made to a
personal ‘God’, Who is not perceived as the supreme
‘being’, but as the
sublime ‘ÙÍ’
(He Who Is), the way He revealed Himself
to Moses”
[7].
As
Saint
Gregory Palamas expresses
with clarity:
“...when
God was responding to Moses, He did not say ‘I
am the essence’, but ‘I
am the One Who Is'
(o ÙÍ);
for,
(the name)
'The One Who Is' does not imply
that 'He Is' from the essence; rather, it is the
essence that comes from the being;
because He, the 'One Who Is' has included in Himself
all of being”
[8]
This helps
us to understand that the Fathers refer to Adam as a
“being”, as a “person”, and not as an “essence”, not as the
symbol of “mankind” - a stance that would not have
been consistent with the overall viewpoint of their
theology.
Notes
[1]
“Christ bore Adam’s nature, without however being ‘of
Adam’. He was not part of the natural continuity of descent
of all humans, from a natural (biological) forefather. While
he did have Mary as His mother, an actual descendant of
Adam (and this guarantees the authenticity of His human
nature), He did not have a natural (biological) father;
a fact that exempts Him from any incorporation in the
natural roots of the race that Adam represents as a
patriarch”. (Andreas Theodorou, “Basic Dogmatic Teaching –
Answers to questions on Dogma”, 3rd edition,
Apostoliki Diakonia, Athens 2006, p. 83).
[2]
“Adam and Eve (December, Sunday of the Holy Forefathers).
The commemoration of the first-created is observed together
with the remaining forefathers of Christ, on the Sunday
before Christmas, at times on December the 16th,
at times on the 18th and at other times on the 19th
of the month” (Sophronius Eustratiades (Metropolitan of
Leontopolis), “Calendar of Saints of the Orthodox Church”,
Apostoliki Diakonia, Athens 1935, p.10)
[3]
Panagiotis I. Boumis,
“Canonical Law”, 3rd ed. augmented, Gregoris,
Athens 2002, pp. 39.41
[4]
Original and translation taken from: Prodromos I.
Akanthopoulos, “Codex of Holy Canons”, 3rd ed.,
Vanias, Thessalonica 2006, pp. 340. 341
[5]
Original and translation taken from: St. John of Damascus,
“Exact publication of the Orthodox faith” (transl. N.
Matsoukas). Pournaras, Thessalonica 1992, pp. 54-57.
[6]
St. Athanasius the Great, “Complete Works” (series
ÅÐÅ No. 11), Dogmatics 1 (Against Arians
1), by Patristic Editions Gregory Palamas,
Thessalonica 1974, pp. 112-113.
[7]
Marios Begzos, “The Future of the Past – Critical
introduction to the Theology of Orthodoxy”, Armos,
Athens 1993, pp. 41-42
[8]
St. Gregory Palamas, “A catalogue of the outcomes of the
incongruous”, No. 37, found in: Writings, tome 1, ed.
P. Christou, Thessalonica 1962, p. 666
